A doctoral student’s view on plagiarism affairs
Yesterday, a scholarly commission of a
German university has decided to revoke the doctorate of the country’s
education minister and a close confidante of the chancellor on the basis of
plagiarism.1 What seems to be the latest instance of a series of
similar affairs not only raises again questions about the integrity of
involved, mostly high-ranking individuals of public or political interest, but
also about the justness of stripping academic titles most often earned decades
ago. Without being a legal expert, it seems convenient to me to turn this
discussion into a rudimentary trial, presenting incriminating evidence and
exonerating circumstances as judged by a protagonist and stakeholder theorist’s
point of view.
Provided that the authors knew what they
were obliged to do when writing scientific pieces in which they relied on the
ideas of others (intent?), there is undeniably ethical ambivalence behind
“…systematically and deliberately faking a mental performance throughout the
entire dissertation…”.2 The driving
force of misbehavior can comprehended to a certain extent; metaphorically think of a school
kid who decides to take on the risk of cheating at an exam in hope of getting
away with it and gaining the respect of his/her mates for being the best in
class. Also the personal choice to jeopardize one’s sincerity and take on the
burden of living with and even building a career upon a skeleton in the closet could be acceptable as long as nobody else is harmed and consequences are taken if
it does come out.
From a broader and more
stakeholder-oriented perspective, the quality and originality of single
research efforts is certainly of interest for a wider range of involved
individuals and institutions (failure to render assistance?). Ultimately, the
reputation and trust in academic education and the community itself is at
stake. In my opinion, the setting in which such major research projects are
developed is essential in preventing misbehavior. By actively striving after
adherence to scientific principles, the set of stakeholders should provide an
enabling context including ethical values. However, it seems also evident that
such a setting cannot be characterized by an ever-growing pressure on young
scholars to perform along one single dimension, namely the quantity of
peer-reviewed publications.
Last but not least, one needs to be aware
of the fact that the act of crime is in most cases several decades ago
(prescription?). At that time, research was carried out and dissertations were
written under nowadays inconceivable circumstances - the World Wide Web and
Google & Co. did not exist. But also the means to rigorously check for
plagiarism were missing, so the inhibition level for copy/paste was presumably
much lower. To draw a comparison between now and then seems pointless in that
regard.
The bottom line is (sentence!) that it
would be wrong if long-ago decisions of individuals to violate the
principle of intellectual property in order to boost their ego leads to negative sentiments towards contemporary science and the
involved stakeholders.
Marc Moser
References
1 Cottrell, C. 2013. "University
Revokes German Official’s Doctorate", in The New York Times, viewed on 5
February, http://nyti.ms/12wwcxN.
2 Bleckmann cited in Cottrell (2013)
2 Bleckmann cited in Cottrell (2013)
No comments:
Post a Comment